September 13, 2011

But the 2 speakers — Roger Clegg and Larry Church — refrained from cranking up the emotions in the big room. There was some clapping and finger-snapping to approve of just about anything pro-affirmative action and some hooting and booing over anything against affirmative action, but the men were in no way drowned out. Clegg and Church got to say what they had to say. During the question period, the various students who got a turn at the mike sounded passionate but not irrational.

I would have liked more discussion of legal doctrine and the precise issues from the case law, but both men chose to concentrate on policy, with the assumption that racial equality and harmony are the desired ultimate goals. What's the best way to get there? It's an old, old question, and the 2 men mainly assembled the usual pro and con arguments, so I doubt if any minds were changed.

As Meade and I walked home, I called the students "admirable" for not getting out of hand and shouting down the speakers, and Meade made fun of my low standard. I said, "It's Wisconsin. Kudos for not rioting."

141 comments:

There is a reason why the word diversity is such a big deal now. It was never heard before the line of Supreme Court cases about education and affirmative action began. Diversity is a backdoor for affirmative action. That's all it is.

I agree that diversity is a laudable goal. But so are a lot of things. Equality before the State is a much more laudable goal.

Further, diversity is nowhere in the Constitution. It's not even in a penumbra or an emanation. Equal treatment before the State is all over the place in that document. It's the sine qua non of the whole regime.

Diversity is racist twaddle dressed up in party clothes. If there is a "racial disparity" those not succeeding need to pull up their socks not make a special pleading. We've lived with this for over 40 years, Tough love. No more coddling.

What got attacked was a press conference at a hotel? But this meeting takes place and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans?

Who is this Linda Chavez ... who "studied all the colleges and universities" in America; but only found the University of Wisconsin "wanting?"

What the students should fear are the exams!

I went to Pasadena City College. NO REQUIREMENTS to get in, other than you bring a #2 pencil.

Yes, classes have "maximums." So, when you're signing up you try to get into classes you need.

Then comes the crowds. For "first day."

Then professors give out tests! (I learned all the test materials are on the footnotes of books you've been assigned to read.) Those tests are deadly. More than half the kids will fail them. And, "drop out."

By the time the professor is through "testing" ... a normal sized class remains.

Some professors even allow you to "take one test score" off your grades.

You know, I found it an interesting way to control the number of kids you have to teach. NO professor kept ALL those who had signed IN! To some of the kids? They were so surprised! They had graduated high school. And, they thought they were IN college.

You don't stay long if you can't pass the tests.

I think Madison was "picked" for this, because no other place in all our states, remains. That would allow this crap to happen. And, make it news.

(Well, it's here.) But I don't think any of this dropped into the "news cycle."

If I was an injured employee at the hotel, though, I'd sew the crap out of the person who hired the venue ... to give a "press conference."

Hope the law suits ahead make it impractical for the hotel to willingly book another "pres conference" for some time to come.

Affirmative Action is dying one way. Or the other.

(The "other" is that even if you stay and pay for a credential ... it won't help you get jobs in the real world.)

Seriously, what are the chances that Mr Clegg was the only one in the room that questioned AA? Seriously, if the goal is divesity and you had a huge crowd and no one, no one was vocal in support of Mr Clegg...then the red shirts did their job.

There is no diversity of opinion, and that is just as bad if not worse than no diversity of skin color or eye shape.

The fact that a campus as large as UW-Madison has such a dynamic debate question and there is only one side in the audience is a statistical demonstration of the choke hold of the thought police.

Why would they riot? They took their marching orders from the Chief of Diversity and Climate earlier today and delivered their message. Sounds like it might have even changed the nature of the deliver from the two debate speakers.

Speaking of diversity "Chiefs", how come he gets to use that name and my hometown basketball team is being forced to change it...even with local Native American support of keeping the noble name? I'd think a really good diversity guy would be sensitive to that and just give himself a pooba name of some kind that was more welcoming and well,more diverse don't you know.

Jeff -- Diversity is a laudable goal for many, many reasons. Having a diverse student population is vital to having a good education. If you don't have diverse viewpoints, if you aren't exposed to them, how can you learn to think critically? Diversity comes in infinite forms: conservative/liberal. rich/poor, religion, skin color, geography, etc., etc. Diversity also comes in the courses on offer and the professors and the books. And the extracurricular activities and the food.

Also, and this is where pro-affirmative action people have a small point, equality before the State is also substantive. If, for example, black people have equal rights to go to UW Madison, but there aren't any there because they can't get in, well, that's a social problem/

Still further, concerning black people specifically, there is something of an obligation on the party of society to ensure that black people have equal opportunities. We have seen what can happen when we don't make this a priority.

Having said all that, equality before the law is most important. And equality before the law means making merit the absolutely primary method of selecting qualified university candidates.

If this is Mary Mary, Althouse asked you to leave and never come back. She never does that, but she did it to you, which I can only take to mean that you went above and beyond the threshold of assholery that even Althouse has. You are in fact the only person she has ever banned, as far as I know. That's quite a testament.

The students were respectful tonight because someone got to their feeble minds in time to say "let's keep this as low profile and out of the general (read "national") consciousness! Let's not lose the gravy train!" They recognize that when the disparity of admissions rigging by the UW is exposed as the highest "No whites or Asians need apply" college in modern history, the country will go apeshit and demand that suits be filed.

The quickest way to kill the issue is to attack the notion of 'elite' universities.

The quickest way to do that is to come up with a 21st century education model centered around our connecting technologies that kills the archaic lecturing model developed by the Europeans in, what, the 18th century?

khanacademy.org is rendering Math departments obsolete, at least as far as teaching in concerned.

BYU Idaho is now led by Kim Clark the former Dean of the Harvard Business School (, by calling of the Mormon church president.)

He has been given a charter to develop just such a radical new education model, and now they are starting to assemble a global on-line adjunct faculty that doesn't need to be full time, or reside in Rexberg Idaho.

Soon we'll separate out those that want an education and those that merely want eminence or credentials.

I don't think we need "socialism." That's something the Europeans excel at. And, basically, it's a system where people can't get into politics.

In America anyone who wants to, can get into politics.

The other interesting thing? There was a time women weren't getting into Caltech. It was a school for men. And, then, around 1963 this changed. Dr. Richard Feynman was DELIGHTED! He said seeing women in his classes made it much more exciting for him to teach.

What did I learn from this particular event? (I didn't learn anything new about our laws. Our Constitution works fine and dandy.)

Now that it costs so much money to go to college, I marvel that kids are still willing to keep on learning.

It's not as if the costs are forcing men and women to become farmers. Or to join the military.

And, I doubt that the kids are meeting anybody whose spent his life growing up in a ghetto.

When opportunities first came knocking? Yup. Poor people. From ghettos. Who had parents and siblings at home who were sacrificing, to make this climb up the educational ladder possible.

Mary -- If you are Mary Mary, then you and Althouse have some terrible feud going. And, if I remember correctly, you wrote some low, low crap about Althouse and you know her personally. She didn't like it. She kicked your ass to the curb. Respect that.

Mary -- There was a Mary here who Althouse apparently knew and who Althouse banned. Mary is a common name. That's why I'm saying Mary Mary, to try to connote the exact person who got banned, as opposed to all the other Marys in the world.

If you are that Mary, you should go. If you aren't, then you merely coincidentally have the same name. My advice is to email Althouse and explain, or possibly change your name.

Mary, I don't care who you are, but you have not grasped that this blog is a private forum. Its owner gets to make the rules. If you don't like them, you can always start your own. That's the beauty of your constitutional right to freedom of expression.

I understand and agree with some of your substantive points. Why not argue them and leave out the personal bullshit?

Before the desire by liberals to make life better for Blacks began, a Black individual who achieved academic success did something. Now that success is tainted by Affirmative Action. We have loads of students of all colors going to college to take remedial courses. How the heck did they get out of high school in the first place, and into college in the second?

We could raised the achievement level of our high schools by reducing the number of high school seniors admitted to college by 75%. Tell the class of 2013 (this year's high school Juniors) that there will be 20% fewer places for them in college in the Fall of 2013. Each year reduce the number of seats available. So when the Class of 2016 arrives and there are just 25% of the seats there are now, they will have worked their buns off for those seats. The ones who didn't make it will have still worked hard in high school.

Affirmative action shouldn't be about race, but about socio-economic conditions of the student. We have Black children of wealthy families who are benefiting, while White children of poor families are not.

First of all, if you characterize the budget protests as "riots," you're an idiot. None of the characteristics of a riot were present, and violence was minimal. In fact, I was there for many of the protests, and a notice about the illegality of carrying weapons into the capitol did not appear until the day the tea partiers were to arrive... telling, isn't it?

Second, I saw you taking video tonight. Why didn't you post any? Perhaps because you were hoping the students would be less respectful than they were - that is, after all, what you thrive on.

Althouse wrote: both men chose to concentrate on policy, with the assumption that racial equality and harmony are the desired ultimate goals. What's the best way to get there?

@Althouse: If any of the "old ideas" for "getting there" explicitly dealt with how better qualified students are justifiably excluded--and especially younger ones who bear no responsibility for prior grievances--those legal arguments deserve to be heard again.

That right there is some hilarious shit. It was minimal, was it? So only a few people got beat up and a little property damage occurred. And that's cool with you, right? After all, what could be more important than the plush salary and benefits of teachers regardless of how effective they are?

The "trickster argument?" Is that like the "gotcha media" argument. Sorry for my choice of words. Violence was non-existent. Happy? Find sources to back up your assertions that there were people injured and property damage occurred, btw. And no - the Administrations absurd estimate of the damage to the capitol doesn't count. Try again.

In the Major Leagues The Mendoza Line is often thought of as the offensive threshold below which a player's presence in Major League Baseball cannot be justified, regardless of his defensive abilities.

Lets say the University is the academic equivalent of The Major Leagues.. and lets say that "diversity" is what a minority student would bring as a "defensive" contribution if you will.. meaning test scores could be below academic average..

I'm not an advocate of AA.. I'm just saying we need to make peace with it, for now, and move on.

I'd like to place a blogside memorial to the comment by Beta Rube that died three slots above in a horrible threadwreck. It was a comment full of the promise of a vibrant future, and its untimely demise should not go unremarked.

It said, more or less, OT: GOP wins NY-9!

Waiting to hear Cedarford's take on the secret doings of the Progressive Jews in this election.

So, I just finished my philosophy 156 paper for tomorrow. I had to demolish an argument that a free-enterprise system is superior to socialism. The argument as given was a crappy argument.

Employing the principle of charity I would conclude that the crappy argument was crappy on purpose as a learning exercise. If I employ paranoia I would conclude that the author of the text wrote a crappy argument because he's a socialist.

NEW YORK (AP) -- Republicans have scored an upset victory in a House race that started as a contest to replace Rep. Anthony Weiner after he resigned in a sexting scandal but became a referendum on President Barack Obama's economic policies.

Retired media executive and political novice Bob Turner defeated Democratic state Assemblyman David Weprin on Tuesday in the special election to fill the seat vacated by Weiner, a seven-term Democrat who resigned in June.

"Second, I saw you taking video tonight. Why didn't you post any? Perhaps because you were hoping the students would be less respectful than they were - that is, after all, what you thrive on."

The students were respectful and didn't riot because they too saw Professor Althouse there, taking video. So they behaved themselves. Wherever she goes, she spreads enlightenment, civility, and good manners.

Before rich people took over Manhattan, it was full of diversity! This was its strong suit! Whatever your interests. Or your culture. You'd find places just for you, in a thriving big city.

The absolute worst thing that can happen would be to lose diversity!

By the way, it's not the Supreme Court that assures this. It's EXPERIENCE! Where you've had success, you've had diversity!

The best way to go downhill in a hurry is to cater to a bunch of rich white people! It's the price tag of why cities DIE. Or are only remembered for what they once contained.

Women, by the way, were the last people on line to be taught anything. (Or, like Sandra Day O'Connor discovered when she graduated second in her law school class at Stanford. All the "white shoe" firms wanted to offer her, was secretarial positions.) Back in the day when secretaries not only answered phones ... But the bright ones knew the difference between the various court forms. And, a man's success really depended on this talent. Which was kept in the background.

Now? As long as someone is willing to go into debt for the credential, you need to be grateful that the credential still has its appeal over a broad spectrum of people. Limit that, and GO OUT OF BUSINESS!

At Pasadena City College, when you register, you're given a number. The number puts you in the back of the line.

You need to collect a certain amount of credits in specific courses, in order to graduate. It should take two years.

What doesn't stay the same is the number given to you at the beginning. Because as you move forward you get numbers allowing you to register for courses, that are smaller. As you go towards the front of the line. (Meaning you get to be first to register for any of the course offerings you want.)

At the end, I kept registering for clay classes. And, I already had my certificate. Plus, I already made it to Cal State LA for the last two years of a BA degree. (Pasadena College only issues AA degrees.) It's considered a junior college.

The points (or units) you earn at Pasadena City College are also transferable.

Lots of kids go to colleges only to find they can't transfer the subjects and grades they've already received.

Diversity is NOT the problem.

Doing work that won't be "transferable" is a much bigger issue.

You know, I'm not surprised the students were polite. This is one of the high water marks for all of our schools these days. Kids have been taught to be polite.

When these debates occur, I'd like to see someone stand up in front of the crowd and say: "Which one of you in attendance will give up your place in this university so someone of color can take your place. Please gather over there and we will remove you from the student population, so someone of color can take your place."

with improved, accessible,and affordable public education, AA wouldn't be an issue. And the real justification for current AA is economic background. The know-nothing conservatives (ie, A-house) would have American education follow an ivy league/Stanford model-- wealthy asians, WASPs and jews at private schools,and the poor folks nowhere to be seen. With 209 in effect that's the UCs as well.

"Jeff -- Diversity is a laudable goal for many, many reasons. Having a diverse student population is vital to having a good education. If you don't have diverse viewpoints, if you aren't exposed to them, how can you learn to think critically? Diversity comes in infinite forms: conservative/liberal. rich/poor, religion, skin color, geography, etc., etc. Diversity also comes in the courses on offer and the professors and the books. And the extracurricular activities and the food."

Well, yes and no. There's your 'diversity' of opinion, Seven. Diversity of opinion can be enlightening, agreed. But when you throw in skin color, well, you might as well be describing M & M's. Below the surface, its all tissue, organs, and water. Sometimes, too, there's a heart.

And, if 'diversity' is your 'goal', I submit to you that you may not actually accomplish much other than what many people (critical thinkers included) consider window dressing.

To say 'diversity' comes in 'infinite forms' really is a bit of a cop-out, no?

Diversity, simply put, is an attribute of a given set (2 or more).

The 'conversation' about diversity and its intended purpose as demonstrated by the left in this country is to cow whites and other select groups chosen for punishment of crimes against humanity into giving preference to nonwhites based on skin color.

In this case, a crime against humanity is simply being white or in the case of asians, hard working and intelligent.

Diversity of statistics, if used in baseball, would render the sport nothing more than a showcase of failure. And this is exactly what is on display in education and academia today.

Today's colleges are anything but diverse despite the obvious reverse discrimination against non-minority students as evidenced by this study. True diversity comes from diversity of thought and the honest, open discussion of different points of view, not, as Don't Tread said, by just throwing different skin colors together. The fact that the left that dominates college administrations and faculty does it's best to shut down any voice that does not agree with them - all the while urging students to join them - makes this impossible.

"Seven Machos said...Jeff -- Diversity is a laudable goal for many, many reasons. Having a diverse student population is vital to having a good education. If you don't have diverse viewpoints, if you aren't exposed to them, how can you learn to think critically? Diversity comes in infinite forms: conservative/liberal. rich/poor, religion, skin color, geography, etc., etc. Diversity also comes in the courses on offer and the professors and the books. And the extracurricular activities and the food."

As far as I can tell you gave one reason...and it's bullshit. This reads like a high school stoner answer to an essay question when he doesn't know the material.

Critical thinking does require diversity at all...it only requires you think critically.

let it be about economic background without the racial preference, hm?

Like...based on socio-economic class? Why, you have an idea Comrade Synova--yet many in the working class/poor are "minorities" are they not? Either way, the anti-AA types are against any entitlements based on socio-economic class as well--why,that's like .sss..socialism. At Ayn Randhouse College, you do not use the S-word.

You want to talk about affirmative action? How about a Republican congressman in NY-9, a district that hadn't had one since 1923!

To put that in perspective, there were people who were born in that district, grew up, went to school, got jobs, got married, had kids, had grandkids, retired and died of old age without ever having a Republican congressman! And that's through good times and bad, strong Democrat presidential candidates and weak ones, but no Republican congressmen. Until now.

The last time a Republican held that seat, Vladimir Lenin was running the Soviet Union, Hitler had not yet attempted the Beer Hall Putsch, and Warren G. Harding was the President of the United States. That's about as safe as a seat gets. If the Democrats can't count on winning in a deep blue district like that, they're in serious trouble.

"Which one of you in attendance will give up your place in this university so someone of color can take your place. Please gather over there and we will remove you from the student population, so someone of color can take your place."

As with so many ideas proposed by leftists - higher taxes, reduced energy usage - this sort of thing is for other people. As in, someone else needs to lose his place so that a POC can have the slot. Not the person proposing the idea.

The University is trying to have it both ways: keeping the meritocracy fierce and intense for whites and asians but easing admission standards for other races. I presume that supporters of affirmative action would agree that eventually the admissions criteria for minorities would have to rise and equalize -- once the numbers of applicants reflected their respective numbers in population. Do supporters of affirmative action concede at least that much?

'Diversity' is a scam where leftists get to create whole University departments devoted to inconsequential "studies", that are little more than neo-Marxist indoctrination feifdoms and administrative sinecures for the graduates of previous phony "Diversity" degree programs.

The curriculae is little more than parroting leftwing racist/sexist KGB inspired "western Imperialism" propaganda; white males are "privileged" regardless of how poor they grew up, people of color and women are not.

Using female supremacism in the courts, they have ensconsed themselves into private businesses so the lawyers are comfortable. What is female supremacism in this case? The notion that in a business setting, female sensibilities are to be catered to. This is how women get to dress sexy for work and no one gives a shit, but if a man puts up a bikini calender, its "sexual harrassment" and re-education is needed for the whole staff.

"Diversity" as it is currently practiced, is little more than institutionalized bullying and harrassment of people leftists don't approve of.

Seven Macho wrote: Having said all that, equality before the law is most important. And equality before the law means making merit the absolutely primary method of selecting qualified university candidates.

I'm not getting from Althouse's rather "incomplete" follow-up to the meeting whether that point was made or not.

Can someone point to another blog or website which is also covering this issue?

white males are "privileged" regardless of how poor they grew up, people of color and women are not.

Women are not, not matter how rich or privileged was their upbringing.

Which creates the spectacle of white, upper class women in Manhattan screeching about women being oppressed.

All while berating their supposed sisters of the middle and lower classes - women of the heartland, because they don't line up on abortion rights, and the lower class African American women because they don't line up on lesbian rights and gay marriage.

But who cares about them, after all - none of THOSE women could get into Wellesley or Yale.

Don't flatter your wife so much Meade. The only people who know Althouse are those unfortunate enough to have had to suffer through a semester of her standing on her soapbox. Undergraduates certainly don't know who she is.

It is sad that academia has fallen so low that it can't puzzle out that treating people differently based on their skin color is wrong. Only in a place as intellectually and morally stunted as a college campus could such an obvious truth be considered the radical, minority opinion.

Kirby as Althouse pointed out nobody was shouted down and the debate took place with about as much civility as demonstrated in the Republican presidential debates with its own brand of cheering. Pogo, I don't know when you when to college but today any number of composition texts on argumentation contain essays on both sides of the AA issue. And Steven,the question is how to we measure merit--should it be strictly on ACT tests given that wealthy families send their kids to better schools and can afford to pay tutors to help improve their scores. If we want to continue to increase the size of the underclass in this country, then strict merit makes sense, but if we are looking to increase the size of the middle class, then other factors need to be considered.

Roger J, Tennessee_tea tard: get yr GED feller, and then maybe learn the meaning of those big terms--like justification, socio-economic class, entitlement--or maybe just forget about it, dreck, and stick to chilton's manuals.

--the original forms of AA were based on economic standing, not just race (ie wealthy blacks or hispanics were not entitled to credits/benes the poor ones from the 'hood were-- poor whites also had perqs, as in CA pre-209 days)

J: reasoned debate is not anything you know about--"reasoned" and J are mutually exclusive--but its a slow wednesday and I do enjoy fucking with you. carry on son. I eagerly await your next fulmination.